I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought he sounded kinda like the scout, I didn't think it would be HIM who thought he sounded like the scout!Birds fly, grass grows, and brotha, I hurt people.*BOINK*I'm a force-a-nature!*BONK*If you was from, where I was from, well you would be fuckin' dead!

Wow... coming on the back on his absurd and pretty disgusting attack on members of the tea party last week, this show should start being called "The Bigoted Picture". Maybe people see a conservative message on South Park not because of any individual thing that was said, but the fact that there is so much to mock the liberal party about. Most of the people who count themselves among their members never so much as research the stance of the opposition, but take their personal liberal pundits at their word. Bob may know a thing or two about movies and pop culture, but the amount of nonsense he spouts concerning the Right is pretty laughable.

But thank you for masking your voice Bob. I was never really a fan of it to begin with, but it's better than your real accent.

Im not sure if thats to fair, I mean I take things away from Southpark but they tend to be things ive come to on my own. Like the hate crime episode made me realise that sentancing crimals by taking into account why they commited the crime really wouldnt work over all as people (in this case judges) are all different and it just wouldnt be fair. I mean I loooooooove the show but I think theres global warming and I think Hybred cars are the future, those episodes seemed to be poking fun of the people more then the message anyway.

And as for an overall message isnt that "EVERYONES a target or NO ONES a target". Southparks great and its made me think about stuff but that doesnt mean I follow it blindly. Still a good ep though Mr.Bob, people should really think for themselves more.

drisky:I have to say one of the most damaging episodes I felt was the one about the word "fag", and how words change meaning over time and people should not be indirectly offended when it is not directed at them. The problem with that is that it is still used as a homophobic slur, is always used in a very negative context, and people have every right it be offended even if direct offense wasn't intended. And that episode is a direct contradiction to the "nigger guy" episode when the lesson was when you have no idea about the negative emotions that come up when the word is said, you have no right to dictate how others should feel. I'm just using that as another example.

And yet, there is living proof that words can radically change. If you said someone was "Queer" 100 years ago, it had NOTHING to do with being homosexual, it meant they were interesting.

Same with Gay. Happy!

Plus, words lose their power over time. For instance, if someone said "Poppycock" in the wrong decade, it was the worst thing you could ever do! But now "Fuck" and "Shit" are part of many peoples daily speech. Censoring and forcing people to never say things only gains those word power and makes them MORE offensive.

Yes, The F-Word episode may not have had the perfect message, but it's a start. I agree that if something like fag is said with harmful intention to a person who would be offended, it is bad. But intention is important.

If we completely disregard intention in words and allow reception to govern them completely, words lose meaning and I could say your use of the word "The" is offensive to me.

I will accept that the other episode is ABSOLUTELY contradictory though.

Sorry for the longness, just had to get that out.

The problem I had with that is gay and queer turned in to words with very different meanings. Fag went from "person that I hate (for being homosexual) to "person that I hate (for any reason that I determine). Both terms are 100% meant to offend someone. If you take a sentience containing gay or queer in it out of context you can still determine intent. Do the same with fag and you can't really tell if in is homophobic or not. Because of this I don't think we should act like they are completely different words, because they are contextually the same, a low brow insult.

Of course the point is these are opinions, not complete moral truths like people treat them. In that way it is the people that call me homophobic for being offended, while they are in fact morally enlightened and superior, they are the ones that really bother me. But they aren't being morally enlightened, they are being aggressive and mean, just to a different kind of person.

Edit: Oh one last thing, I feel that fuck and shit are a completely different issue because they are not about people.

I'm sorry, but I'm forced to draw Death of the Author on this one. Whether or not the guys who made South Park intend to deliver a message or not is completely and utter irrelevant. Just like Fahrenheit 451 is about censorship regardless of whatever Ray Bradbury wants it to be about, if South Park can as a narrative help me refind my own world views the authors' intention has no bearing whatsoever.

It's a silly source for such things, but I defend any unorthodox sources, seeing that my own is Calvin and Hobbes.

I'm going to disagree with Bob on this. I don't think that it is fair to say that you can't take some lessons from South Park. If for no other reason than because I don't have clear concise beliefs. If you ask me about my beliefs on one thing, you'd probably see me as left leaning while my other beliefs might make you think I lean to the right. I think most people are like this. The media and politicians like to think that people are simple and conform to certain preset beliefs, but that isn't true. We all have complicated beliefs.

For example, I support both the Death Penalty and Abortion. Yes, even late term abortions in the event of certain complications or emergencies. Is that such a simple and concise message to convey? Should people not listen to what I have to say because I don't have a certain overall liberal or conservative message?

I'm not saying you should live you life according to what South Park and Matt and Trey Parker say. But I don't think it's fair to disregard that aspect just because they have a complicated concept or the show is funny.

As for the accent. I can understand why you don't use it during your "respectable" work. The Boston accent does rub some people the wrong way. Then again, most "in your face" accents do. I absolutely hate the valley girl accent. Not even a fan of the Southern Belle accent. I think what got most people is that in you last video it just seemed random. You'd have it for all of a sentence and then you'd be back in your "normal" speech making voice. The fact that it was so random and over so quick, I think made it stand out so much. It did for me at least. Every time you'd slip into the Boston accent, it kinda knocked me off my train of thought.

Also, my spell check suggested speechifying when I wrote "speechmaking" in that paragraph. Somehow that just makes me sad.

Haven't watched South Park very consistently so I don't think I could say I base my entire life around it. That said, what? You can't get life lessons out of South Park? Bob, you pointed specifically to ManBearPig as an example. Well, I just watched that episode, and I think the message was pretty clear: Al Gore feared that he was no longer relevant, so he invented a boogeyman for people to fear, came up with a series of solutions which only caused more harm, and in the end took credit for saving everyone from something that was never a threat. Guess what, Bob? THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. Moral of the story: Don't make life worse by fighting imaginary problems.

What's bothering you about South Park isn't that it doesn't have to do with an inconsistent message, but rather that the show frequently turns against your own ideology. So, I'd say this episode was less for our benefit than for yours, providing a vehicle for allowing you to watch the show without offending your far-left "conscience" (for lack of a better word).

No, there's not enough in South Park to form a philosophy around, I'll grant that, but saying there's no valuable messages to be found in it is also wrong. And by the way, Andrew Sullivan is a TERRIBLE example of a conservative. If he was any more of a RINO people would be hunting him for his horn.

I always figured the entire point of South Park was to make fun of everyone and everything that could possibly be mocked for any reason. I don't think any major political movement, religious belief, corporation, organization, or celebrity has been spared in South Park's run.

Kinda funny how some people like to point out the episodes in which South Park happened to be making fun of whatever they agree with like it's something special.

I take lessons from South Park when it agrees with me. Which is almost all the time.

Also, I think it's funny because one of the guys (not sure if Parker or Stone) said something about religion making more sense than athiesm, which I guess would make at least on philosophical viewpoint between Parker and Stone conflicting - their opinion on religion. Hmmm.

Well I think South Park basically has everyone and everything in their sights anyway. Except World of Warcraft. Even when the South Park boys became grotesque carpal tunnel-inflicted half-humans, the tone implied Parker and Stone are totally fine with World of Warcraft. ...huh.

While I'll admit that the show has had some hilarious moments, a lot of it basically amounted to Matt and Trey beating up on straw men. That more than anything is probably why some people (especially in the political realm) would try to label it as philosophy.

Anyways, I've always been on again and off again with South Park but I stopped watching the show entirely a couple of years ago. Mostly because it got to the point where it stopped being funny and became mean spirited than anything else.

I'm certain someone said this already. The message about Mormonism was about acceptance, or at the very least tolerance in some fashion. The scientology episodes were meant to prod at the lawsuit hungry higher-ups, hence the "We'll SUE you!" that went on for two full minutes and the names being altered to John Smith and Jane Smith for the credits.

Also south park fan here, yes its satire but I think some episodes can really do point out social message. Like you said yourself bob you liked the episode on censorship, so its really only a message when it pertains to you? Other episodes are just about fun and silly.

-Dragmire-:I found most episodes were common sense oriented attacking the over reactions of a particular group. I need more than Trey and Matt for source material for my views(HUMANCENTiPAD's take on click-to-accept agreements/contracts is one I've held for a while now though as with many people on this site who don't like the EULAs).

And who wants to be part of a group that changes political views on an episode to episode basis.

Canadian columnist Jaime J. Weinman observes that the most die-hard conservatives who identified themselves as "South Park Republicans" began turning away from the label when the show ridiculed Republicans in the season nine (2005) episode "Best Friends Forever".

Shows how deep their beliefs were doesn't it?

My personal favorite episode from this season at this point is "City Sushi". Political/Social views be damned, it's just a really funny episode.

I would never say that my views align very much with those of Parker and Stone, as theirs do seem to be opportunistic and "everybody is dumb but us" more often than not, or simply "let's make fun of this person, because they're famous," which of course replaced "let's make fun of this person, because they DON'T DESERVE TO BE famous" (Paris Hilton is a Stupid Spoiled Whore, anyone?). But one thing I've noticed is that they ALWAYS make fun of Republicans.

Thank you Mr. Chipman, I don't really care much for South Park one way or the other, but these people who use South Park as the corner stone of their personal philosophy (Or worse, hearing some of the jokes and mistaking them for facts) are among the most irritating human beings that have ever existed.

Also, I actuall like your Boston accent Bob, Boston is one of my favorite American cities, though I will say that it is a bit jarring to hear you switch from one voice to the other within the same sentence.

1. I blame as much of the "South Park is news" idea on John Stewart and Steve Colbert as I do Matt and Trey. Yes, South Park existed well before, BUT TDS has toed the line of "comedy as politics" as often as any other in TV history. You can go even further back and blame Lenny Bruce for making fun of the establishment and helping to inspire Pryor and Carlin. Bottomline, South Park is part of a wave of Comedy is Politics brand shows, but one that remembers to take a HUGE shit for laughs sake at least once an episode.

1.5 I'm from SF, and the smug episode is out personal douchebag test. If you loved it, not a douchebag. Got offended? Fuck off, hippie!

2. Eric Cartman is the sum total of all good and bad elements of being an American. He is the Everyman for our time. We need to raise the bar!

Rogue 09:Most of the people who count themselves among their members never so much as research the stance of the opposition, but take their personal liberal pundits at their word.

While your statement can be true in a variety of cases, we are certainly not the only side who sometimes believes at face value and does no further research. If we were judging on voters who attend town hall meetings and debates: right wingers have accused Obama of being an Arab (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QhJJBfwJME&feature=related) and when Ron Paul was asked the question (paraphrased) "should the government let the uninsured die?" audience members shouted "yes" O(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJiao).

Any logical mind should find the hypocrisy with that second example, AND, the blind, uninformed belief fed to the right wing masses by politicians and pundits that were never fact-checked by those who still believe it, that Obamacare was setting up Death Panels to "kill the elderly". The elderly being especially prone to not being able to afford healthcare, and therefore part of the "the government should let the uninsured die" sentiment. Of course, the average right wing voter, if faced with the death of a loved one for not having health care, would still blame Obama because Glenn Beck said so.

I know we have some wingnuts on our side. I invite you to research and present them.

My question is: Would you say the same about Penn and Teller's Bullshit?

A lot of the issues lampooned on South Park (the more recent episodes) are very similar to the topics covered on Penn and Teller. A lot of them come to the same conclusion. Penn and Teller, however claim that they are backed up by a team of crack researchers and the purpose of their show is to educate the audience on some very important issues (albeit often in a crass way).

I would say gaining your political views from a cartoon is no worse than getting it from an internet forum, political speech (that always dodges the issue), paid advertisement that glosses over all the details and etc. At least the cartoon tends to be more accessible, less condescending and often spurs people to do their own research (which is the best outcome). At the worst it's another nutjob getting his views from popular media.

I think South Park is a decent show. But, I have noticed one trend: Usually, any given episode on any given topic explores why both extreme sides of the issue are stupid. So, I guess you could say that the creators consistently endorse something as simple as actually thinking about both sides of an issue... not just taking a knee-jerk, extreme position. They definitely waver from that message here and there, pushing their own take a bit more on occasion. But, if you look at the Mormon episode... they spent most of the episode going over how crazy Mormon beliefs are, then pointed out that completely writing someone off based on their beliefs alone is a dick thing to do. I'd say that's pretty balanced.

I don't get it ... South Park can't make a good socio-political point, just because it's all over the map?

It's actually quite the opposite. Trey and Matt, by devoting themselves to whatever happens to piss them off at the moment instead of a steady message, have provided a BETTER social commentary than someone who dodges certain issues because they're (as you put it) sacred cows. Not having a dedicated and uniformed message allowed them to point out flaws EVERYWHERE.

And yes, flaws exist EVERYWHERE. No one ideology or religion or political stance is perfect.

One of the big concepts on Star Trek (particularly TNG) was the elimination of poverty with the invention of replicators. Once food was effectively free, no one went hungry and everyone lived happily ever after. But, their left-of-center base doesn't allow them to contemplate the potential for rampant obesity, or crash in human productivity once everyone realized they didn't have to work hard to put food on the table. Might have made for some thought-provoking episodes

Is everything on South Park gold? No, don't be ridiculous. South Park takes everything up to 11, just to make it funnier. But generally the lunatic fringe of whatever issue they're tackling DOES exist, and really is as mind-numbingly pants-on-head-retarded as portrayed in the episode. For example, I play WoW. I'm also a Marine, in damned good physical shape, I've deployed to the deserts a few times, and I can accurately engage a man-sized target from 500 yards using an M-16 without the assistance of a scope or any support (bipod, sandbag, etc) I got a kick out of the WoW episode of South Park because I know there really are people like that. I see the little nuggets of truth buried in there, and I see the obvious embellishment layered on for comedic purposes.

DarthFennec:Yeah, I never liked people who took their ideas from South Park (or from anywhere outside their own personal experience for that matter), but I've always found that 98% of the things Matt and Trey say in that show, I already agree with, and that they explain the reason they hold those views much better than I ever could.

Also, Bob sounding like the Scout automatically makes him a hundred times more badass.

I must be the only person who's never run across the "I get my beliefs from South Park" type on the net then.

I do find that many eps of SP mirror my own beliefs and ideas, like alcoholism not being a disease (throw obesity in there too and it's a double-whammy. There's no virus or bacteria that cause either of these. They're self inflicted. One's a chemical addiction, the other is, damned if I know. Those are arguments for another thread tho), but South Park is just a cartoon made to entertain, amuse and possibly annoy as many people as possible.

Taking your belief structure from a cartoon is as stupid as taking your belief system from, well, a religious institution, really. If you're not smart enough to work stuff out yourself, do us all a favour: Wear one of those signs Bill Engval has been talking about for years and stay OUT of public life/office.

I personally liked south park whether it took on something I liked or something I hated. If I hated the thing, I could be amused by the takedown. If I liked it, I could be amused by how overblown the takedown tended to be. Plus, there were generally plenty of jokes that worked whatever I thought of it.

It's why I found it so grating when Chef left due to the scientology episode. By leaving essentially because the episode was offensive to his religion, he implied that he really intended to offend everyone who was made fun of in all the previous episodes, rather than just poking a little jab at it.

the accent makes me laugh but at the same time im confused.is it a joke? no? people really talk like that? interesting please revert back to the fake accent its distracting and too much for my mind to handle. :Si thought the UK was bad for various accents and custom languages. and im Welsh!